meh, sometimes rules and policies are stupid, and there is no harm in changing them. this is just a game, not a seat in congress. a human wants to play and pay money to do so, literally replacing an empty slot that pays nothing and performs poorly (which we all know to be true). literally no one is hurt by letting them pay now and play. leaning on precedent when precedent is dumb is dumb.

so I can see why they wouldnt give it to him if someone else applied.

User 1 relinquishes the job
Users 1 and 2 apply for the job
User 2 is more qualified than User 1, but neither are sufficiently qualified
The gig goes to a sim

If they now give the gig to user 1, who (unjustifiably or not) is less qualified than user 2, then i can see why it would upset user 2. "hey, i got rejected from this job and took a worse post - but i have a better resume than the coach who you gave the job to!"

I'd like to note - i think its silly that he isn't qualified - they seem to measure success on an absolute scale and didn't take into account that he was starting in such a bad situation and progressed. I also think that its silly - if he's qualified then he's qualified, and if he's not qualified then he should be fired

One possible alternative to firings: you should have to re-qualify for your jobs after 5 seasons or something like that. have them be "contracts" that you sign with a school when you take them over... you can break the contract to change schools if you want, but at the end of 5 seasons, if you haven't met the qualifications, you don't get to renew your contract at that school

what's nonsense about this situation is that WIS will let horrible coaches stay at schools forever as long as they renew...as we all know, firings are near-absent in this game. if HD was built to care about consistently qualified coaches, that wouldn't be how the game was set up. but financially this makes sense for WIS, so, ok, sure. but in this case, the policy/position errs on the side of adherence to principle over keeping a paying customer. that's just inconsistent with the firings logic.

Rules and policies may be stupid but they are there for a reason. This is simple and the OP took responsibility(but now seems to think it's unjust).

1. You qualify for a job and, if you're the most qualified, you get said job.
2. You renew each season.
3. You probably never get fired.

If you don't do #2, you have to re-apply and be qualified. Simple.

I am not qualified for any D1 job in Rupp(1 season of D2). I applied for 4 anyway. So, if no qualified users applies, should I get one of them? After all, some rules and policies are stupid. And I should be able to do a better job than some SIMAI. And D1 needs more users. That said, of course I shouldn't. I'm not qualified by the set rules and policies. OP did not qualify for the Indiana job. The circumstances suck but there is no surprise loss of a team.

mike, your logic implies that all rules and policies should be kept, because some rules and policies make sense. that is not a rebuttal to anything said here.

My logic implies that you set a precedent when you ignore rules and policies. Nothing more, nothing less. And, unless I'm completely misunderstanding, it seems a lot of people in this thread would like to ignore set rules and policies to set a new precedent.

No?

As a self proclaimed "bad boy", I've always lived by the motto- rules are made to be broken. Stop letting the man keep us down!

Was the user at fault: yes. Should an exception be made: yes. Both can be true. He has 139 seasons under his belt and there doesn't seem to have been anything crazy going on here (i.e. if he paid late continuously). That's the exact type of user WIS should be trying to retain.

Breaking them would benefit me, and everyone I assume, but, if I was WifS, I wouldn't do it. Because of this:

User 1 relinquishes the job
Users 1 and 2 apply for the job
User 2 is more qualified than User 1, but neither are sufficiently qualified
The gig goes to a sim

If they now give the gig to user 1, who (unjustifiably or not) is less qualified than user 2, then i can see why it would upset user 2. "hey, i got rejected from this job and took a worse post - but i have a better resume than the coach who you gave the job to!"


Without question, this would happen every season in every world and, quite possibly, multiple times. CS wouldn't have time for anything else HD-related and, undoubtedly, would make the wrong call, in someone's mind, every time. Can of worms I wouldn't open.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 4/14/2017 12:26:00 PM (view original):
I just did something similar.. I forgot to renew, and them didn't get hired back. I emailed the guy to wish him good luck and he offered to give me the team back. I sent in a ticket and cs said there was nothing they could do.

I am pushing back.

Also, I won the national championship last year and was somehow not the best candidate.

Any follow up on this situation?

MikeT is acting like this coach did this continuously. If it was a pattern of behavior that's one thing. We don't have anything to show that this happened on a regular basis with this user and if that was the case it seems that WIS would have mentioned that in their post. Instead it appears to be an innocent error that could easily be corrected if CS was competent.

Mike has his mind made up and is inventing extreme situations to justify his argument instead of listening to any other POV. not part of any legitimate debate here.

No, I'm acting like it sets a precedent. 10-15 users who have never done this lets it happen next season. 10-15 the season after. And the next. It's just not something I'd want to deal with on a regular basis if I was WifS.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/18/2017 9:58:00 AM (view original):
No, I'm acting like it sets a precedent. 10-15 users who have never done this lets it happen next season. 10-15 the season after. And the next. It's just not something I'd want to deal with on a regular basis if I was WifS.

Or you just say a user that hasn't had an issue in over 100 seasons can get one pass. People with common sense understand that exceptions are sometimes justified.

barely 10-15 users even read the forums regularly enough to see this, and one of them is quitting over it, lol. it'd take years to get 10-15 users asking for this...and not HD years, actual years. extreme scenario. not realistic.